Case: 12-10171 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 1 of 5
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-10171
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:11-cr-00074-RDP-HGD-3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ARCHIE LEE ATKINS,
a.k.a. Archie,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Alabama
________________________
(February 6, 2013)
Before BARKETT, MARTIN and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-10171 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 2 of 5
Archie Atkins appeals his conviction for one count of robbery, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 1951, one count of using and carrying a firearm during the
commission of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), and
one count of being a felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)(1). On appeal, Atkins argues the evidence was inconsistent and
insufficient to convict him. After review, we affirm Atkins’ convictions.
We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo. United States v.
Maxwell, 579 F.3d 1282, 1299 (11th Cir. 2009). In determining whether sufficient
evidence exists, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the
Government, and ask whether a reasonable fact finder could have concluded
beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty. Id. “The evidence need
not be inconsistent with every reasonable hypothesis except guilt, and the jury is
free to choose between or among the reasonable conclusions to be drawn from the
evidence presented at trial.” United States v. Poole, 878 F.2d 1389, 1391 (11th
Cir. 1989). Credibility determinations are the province of the jury, and we assume
the jury resolved those determinations in a manner that supports its verdict.
United States v. Thompson, 473 F.3d 1137, 1142 (11th Cir. 2006). When a
criminal defendant chooses to testify on his own behalf, and there is corroborative
evidence of guilt, his statements, if disbelieved by the jury, may be considered as
2
Case: 12-10171 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 3 of 5
substantive evidence of his guilt. United States v. Brown, 53 F.3d 312, 314–15
(11th Cir. 1995).
To obtain a robbery conviction, the Government must prove the defendant
knowingly acquired someone else’s property against the victim’s will by using
actual or threatened force or violence or causing the victim to fear harm, and such
actions obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate commerce. 18 U.S.C. § 1951.
To sustain a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), the Government must
present sufficient evidence that the defendant carried or used a firearm during the
commission of a crime of violence. To convict a defendant under 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)(1), the Government must show the defendant knowingly possessed
ammunition and “was previously convicted of an offense punishable by a term of
imprisonment exceeding one year,” and the ammunition “was in or affecting
interstate commerce.” United States v. Palma, 511 F.3d 1311, 1315 (11th Cir.
2008).
There was sufficient evidence to support Atkins’ convictions. Co-defendant
Arthur Williams testified that he, Atkins, and Darrell Wilkins robbed an armored
car driver. Atkins carried a gun, which he pointed at the driver as Williams and
the driver were struggling. Williams stated that, after the driver saw Atkins’ gun,
the driver ceased struggling, and dropped a bag containing cash and checks into
3
Case: 12-10171 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 4 of 5
their vehicle. In conjunction with evidence that many of the stolen checks would
have been processed out of state, Williams’ testimony established that Atkins
committed robbery. Williams’ testimony also established that Atkins carried and
used a firearm during the robbery, a crime of violence. Although Atkins testified
he was not involved, the jury was entitled to believe Williams and disbelieve
Atkins. See Thompson, 473 F.3d at 1142; Brown, 53 F.3d at 314-15.
The evidence presented at trial was also sufficient to show Atkins
committed the crime of being a felon in possession of ammunition.1 There is no
dispute that officers found ammunition inside Atkins’ truck when he was arrested;
the only disputed issue was whether Atkins knew the ammunition was inside his
truck. Williams testified that during the robbery, Atkins carried a .45 caliber
Glock. The ammunition found inside Atkins’ truck was for a .45 caliber Glock. A
reasonable juror could have inferred that Atkins would have known about
ammunition designed for use in a gun that he carried during a robbery a little more
than a week earlier. Although Atkins testified he did not know about the
ammunition, because there was corroborating evidence of guilt, the jury was
entitled to conclude otherwise. See Brown, 53 F.3d at 314-15.
1
The parties stipulated that Atkins was a felon and that the ammunition had moved in
interstate commerce.
4
Case: 12-10171 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 5 of 5
AFFIRMED.
5